I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
Look, the politicians running for president right now are drastically different. Drastically. Like, they haven't been this different since Carter and Reagan. Regardless of what your stance is on a given subject, unless you're a crypto-anarchist or big-L Libertarian or Marxist communist or something, one of them will be aligned with your views. And even if you are one of those things, one of them will still be a lot closer to your ideal than the other. Saying that our choice is meaningless, or that neither one is appreciably different, or that they each offer equally foolish solutions, is full-blown ignorance. Full-stop.
If you don't know who to vote for, check out their websites. Watch their speeches. Divorce yourself of the false wisdom of "they won't do anything they're promising," because they will each likely try and succeed to a point in bringing about the policies they preach. So pick which one has the better-sounding vision, and which one has the more plausible solutions. And then vote for that person.
If you're insistent upon being more-cynical-than-thou, that's fine, but sit back and let the grown-ups steer the country.
ElJeffe on
I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
:arrow: Terrible condition of foreign relations in addition to the fact that neither Obama nor McCain are against invading Iran or for in pulling troops out of Iraq immediately and focusing on Afghanistan.
Define terrible? I don't see how America is at a disadvantage in foreign relationships, we are still very powerful. As for the hawkish attitude, yet again globally and historically this is normal.
:arrow: No realistic plans for universal healthcare (we'd rather spent billions on war).
This is a republic, the only policies that get enacted are the ones that are agreed upon by most people. Universal Healthcare is not a universally acceptable government program in America. I suggest you work on this from the state level, you will have much more success, there are even states out there already have such plans.
:arrow: 'The Mortgage Crisis' and the fact that the Housing Act isn't working.
It's the governments job to clean up other peoples stupid mistakes? Those people who were at the top of this scam are being prosecuted and will most likely have heavy fines and jail time. The people who bought into the scam of buying more than they can afford will have a nice lesson in economics and will be less likely to repeat this mistake if they have to pay for it, I dont see the problem
It seems like to me that you have an idealistic view of America; that we should be the perfect white knight in the world of evil, standing up for all that is right and always doing the right thing. I'm sorry, but your view of what's right is not agreed upon by everyone. No matter what anyone promises you the country will never be perfect.
;;TLDR:
Can America be "saved"? America does not need to be saved. We are not perfect, but we are just fine.
ElJeffe is right. And that's why Obama is wrong for the country - he's not as bad as Carter, but unfortunately, he's listening to Pelosi.
I like how you consistently make arguments with no basis whatsoever.
"Obama listens to Pelosi, RAWR RAWR RAWR!"
No policy. No intelligence. No comparison of voting records or analysis. No explanation of what policies they will enact that are harmful, because lord knows if you tried to make a point you might make a point worth debating. You base every argument you make on a cult of personality. Can America be saved from voters like you?
Anyway, Jeffe is basically right as to the OP. This whole cynicism about politics is basic laziness.
If all the people running the country are crooks, that doesn't make me want to hide under a rock, it makes me want to get involved in getting rid of them. Waiting for some perfect savior to appear and give you someone to vote for is pure silliness. Government is a mean, nasty mess. Best to get down in it if you want something from it.
Eat it You Nasty Pig. on
it was the smallest on the list but
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
I ask, can America be "saved"? Is it worth saving? Or is it too late?
What fate are you really worried about?
America isn't going to "go away." Barring alien invasion or sudden extinction of the human race due to Super-AIDS, here isn't going to be a time in the near future when the United States doesn't exist.
And I don't think we're heading to another Great Depression. Yeah, the dollar has been on a downward slide for a while and the current recession is pretty bad, but I don't think we're looking at complete economic catastrophe.
However, the US has been the dominant force in the world since long before the Cold War ended. (The USSR looked scarier than it actually was.) And by dominant, I don't mean more powerful than any other single country... I mean arguably more powerful than all the other countries put together. And I mean this on all possible axes: military power, economic power, and cultural importance. We've basically been kings of the world since World War II, if not longer.
And now our power is waning. We're still the big dog. We're still, arguably, the dominant military and economic force. But we're not quite as powerful as we were when the Iron Curtain fell. Goods are getting more expensive due to a weakening dollar. Foreign auto manufacturers are opening plants on American soil to capitalize on exchange rates rather than the other way around. Can we "save" America, King of Everything? Eh, probably not. Our empire had its day. Can we "save" America, the Country That Happens to Be a Rocking Place to Live in Most Ways Even Though Our Healthcare and Mass Transit Sucks? I don't think that's at risk of going away any time soon.
Feral on
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
Remember the great depression. Yeah that probably sucked way more than now.
I wish I had some kind of gigantic gold belt that I could give you right now as Undisputed Thread Champion.
Why do people seem to think that Nader "stole" the votes from Gore in 2000? He didn't steal anything, they were the Democrats' votes to lose. It was the Democrats' fault for failing to connect with the voters and getting them to vote for them. It wasn't Nader's fault, it was Gore's/DNC's fault.
You think there aren't 500 or 600 Nader voters in Florida who only voted Nader because they thought it wouldn't make a difference? And who, given the opportunity, would have definitely changed their votes to Gore given the chance? And I'm not talking about eight years of hindsight. I'm talking about back in November of 2000.
The electoral college, and the sheer size of the electorate, gives people the impression that mathematically their vote doesn't really count for much, and that they can afford to throw it to a third party to make a statement. That it won't have any effect. In 2000 a lot of those people learned that they were dead fucking wrong, which is why like seven people showed up to vote for Nader in 2004.
Oh, and if you honestly think there's no difference between the two major-party candidates in the Presidential election this year, and in most elections in general, then I'd argue that you're either A) insanely fucking stupid, or so far outside the political norm (such that they both appear to be at the same point) to make your views largely irrelevant. Or quite possibly both.
South Park Politics (TM) is great for guys in their mid/early-20's who think being super-cynical will get them chicks. In the real world it's funny because while it contains a grain of truth it's also greatly exaggerated.
ElJeffe is right. And that's why Obama is wrong for the country - he's not as bad as Carter, but unfortunately, he's listening to Pelosi.
I like how you consistently make arguments with no basis whatsoever.
"Obama listens to Pelosi, RAWR RAWR RAWR!"
No policy. No intelligence. No comparison of voting records or analysis. No explanation of what policies they will enact that are harmful, because lord knows if you tried to make a point you might make a point worth debating. You base every argument you make on a cult of personality. Can America be saved from voters like you?
I figured it was obvious to people who knew about Obama's economic advisors. They lean much farther into the libertarian realm with regard to economic theory. What he's been saying on the campaign trail is more in line with the left of his party (Pelosi). Windfall profit taxes? He doesn't actually believe in that because he is a smart man, but I'm worried that he'll bow down to the Senate, like everyone else has done.
I've spoken pretty extensively on this stuff in other threads, just haven't done so here, because the thread premise is fucking stupid.
America doesn't need saving from anyone but the American self-loathers.
universal health care is a horrible idea anyway. in european nations with universal health care you pay 9 dollars a gallon for gas along with other extra taxes for the health care. when you go to the doctor its first come first serve but there is no reason to keep you there or help you at all really they get payed regardless (walmart-ish service quality). also, if you want any kind of good insurance you get your own and pay for it on your own since your job isnt going to give you something that the government provides.
:arrow: Expanding powerbase of the fundamentalist right.
Expanding? Hasn't the country been fairly conservative/fundamentalist for most of it's history? The liberal movement only really took off in the 60s?
This is a myth. The country goes through periods sometimes known as Great Awakenings in which there is a revival of (usually reactionary) religious thought and an increase in the political influence in the same. The United States was founded by radically liberal secularists.
:arrow: Terrible condition of foreign relations in addition to the fact that neither Obama nor McCain are against invading Iran or for in pulling troops out of Iraq immediately and focusing on Afghanistan.
Define terrible? I don't see how America is at a disadvantage in foreign relationships, we are still very powerful. As for the hawkish attitude, yet again globally and historically this is normal.
The United States has had a severe decline in international relations in the last 8 years and in trade deficits in the last 20-30.
Historical precedent is not equivalent to good or acceptable.
:arrow: No realistic plans for universal healthcare (we'd rather spent billions on war).
This is a republic, the only policies that get enacted are the ones that are agreed upon by most people. Universal Healthcare is not a universally acceptable government program in America. I suggest you work on this from the state level, you will have much more success, there are even states out there already have such plans.
Look at those goal posts move! From most to universal in a couple of words!
Most Americans believe government can play a role in fixing the health care system. Two-thirds say the federal government should guarantee that all Americans have health insurance — and a similar number says providing health insurance for all is a more serious problem than keeping health care costs down.
:arrow: 'The Mortgage Crisis' and the fact that the Housing Act isn't working.
It's the governments job to clean up other peoples stupid mistakes? Those people who were at the top of this scam are being prosecuted and will most likely have heavy fines and jail time. The people who bought into the scam of buying more than they can afford will have a nice lesson in economics and will be less likely to repeat this mistake if they have to pay for it, I dont see the problem
A lack of understanding on how the economy works might have something to do with that.
Say, what do you call a market whose bottom falls out of it? Does this have an effect on other areas of the economy?
Its almost like the elements of the system are connected!
It seems like to me that you have an idealistic view of America; that we should be the perfect white knight in the world of evil, standing up for all that is right and always doing the right thing. I'm sorry, but your view of what's right is not agreed upon by everyone. No matter what anyone promises you the country will never be perfect.
Your advocacy for less good things is inherently illogical.
;;TLDR:
Can America be "saved"? America does not need to be saved. We are not perfect, but we are just fine.
An overwhelming majority of the country thinks its going in the wrong direction. What happened to those republican ideals? Were they buried in Republican propaganda?
In Europe, the per person spending on health care is a small fraction of what we spend in the US, coverage is universal and life expectancy is just as long or longer.
Fixed. Its GOP BS propaganda, there's no basis for those claims.
universal health care is a horrible idea anyway. in european nations with universal health care you pay 9 dollars a gallon for gas along with other extra taxes for the health care. when you go to the doctor its first come first serve but there is no reason to keep you there or help you at all really they get payed regardless (walmart-ish service quality). also, if you want any kind of good insurance you get your own and pay for it on your own since your job isnt going to give you something that the government provides.
I invite you start a health care thread if you honestly believe that the drivel you just posted is both true and relevant. I could crit you with a wall of text upside the head right now but it would derail this thread.
Feral on
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
Hey, if I could vote for Thomas Jefferson, I would. But there isn't a party that has those principles and there hasn't been one since the Federalist party died. What we have left is a split where both sides are retarded on half the issues.
ElJeffe is right. And that's why Obama is wrong for the country - he's not as bad as Carter, but unfortunately, he's listening to Pelosi.
I like how you consistently make arguments with no basis whatsoever.
"Obama listens to Pelosi, RAWR RAWR RAWR!"
No policy. No intelligence. No comparison of voting records or analysis. No explanation of what policies they will enact that are harmful, because lord knows if you tried to make a point you might make a point worth debating. You base every argument you make on a cult of personality. Can America be saved from voters like you?
I figured it was obvious to people who knew about Obama's economic advisors. They lean much farther into the libertarian realm with regard to economic theory. What he's been saying on the campaign trail is more in line with the left of his party (Pelosi). Windfall profit taxes? He doesn't actually believe in that because he is a smart man, but I'm worried that he'll bow down to the Senate, like everyone else has done.
I've spoken pretty extensively on this stuff in other threads, just haven't done so here, because the thread premise is fucking stupid.
America doesn't need saving from anyone but the American self-loathers.
Yeah, why the fuck would you want to listen to someone like Warren Buffet on the economy?
Yeah, why the fuck would you want to listen to someone like Warren Buffet on the economy?
If I want investing advice, I'll ask Warren Buffet. If I want advice on running the economy of the only superpower left, I'm probably going to dig a little deeper than that.
Lot of arguing, lot of praising, lot of campaigning, nothin' doing.
Edit: I don't think anyone has a clue if the U.S. needs fixing, or if it can be fixed in the case of its failing. Even the Romans had their time to fade out.
Witch_Hunter_84 on
If you can't beat them, arrange to have them beaten in your presence.
0
Options
JacobkoshGamble a stamp.I can show you how to be a real man!Moderatormod
when you go to the doctor its first come first serve but there is no reason to keep you there or help you at all really they get payed regardless (walmart-ish service quality).
If that's true, then why do Europeans (and most of the civilized world) live longer than us?
I ask, can America be "saved"? Is it worth saving? Or is it too late?
What fate are you really worried about?And I don't think we're heading to another Great Depression. Yeah, the dollar has been on a downward slide for a while and the current recession is pretty bad, but I don't think we're looking at complete economic catastrophe.
However, the US has been the dominant force in the world since long before the Cold War ended. (The USSR looked scarier than it actually was.) And by dominant, I don't mean more powerful than any other single country... I mean arguably more powerful than all the other countries put together. And I mean this on all possible axes: military power, economic power, and cultural importance. We've basically been kings of the world since World War II, if not longer.
And now our power is waning. We're still the big dog. We're still, arguably, the dominant military and economic force. But we're not quite as powerful as we were when the Iron Curtain fell. Goods are getting more expensive due to a weakening dollar. Foreign auto manufacturers are opening plants on American soil to capitalize on exchange rates rather than the other way around. Can we "save" America, King of Everything? Eh, probably not. Our empire had its day. Can we "save" America, the Country That Happens to Be a Rocking Place to Live in Most Ways Even Though Our Healthcare and Mass Transit Sucks? I don't think that's at risk of going away any time soon.
I agree with almost everything there (GDP is growing, not falling and the dollar is recovering right now and commodities in general are getting cheaper. Also I think you're wrong about car manufacturers).
We might have to pay more for imported goods in the future, but that was an unsustainable position to begin with. We can't rely on other countries to provide us with billions of cheap laborers forever.
The fact is the rest of the world is catching up to us economically. It's unavoidable for them to catch up. And it can be good for everybody. It's hard not to think of economic things in zero sum terms, but its not a zero sum game. Everybody can be better off. When anyone's economy grows, the US generally benefits.
To the OP:
I used to have similar feelings as you. I would suggest you get a broader sense of the world and the country. Try to understand the positions you disagree with. When you're in an insulated environment where everyone agrees with you its hard to even comprehend other views. Meet people you disagree with, you'll probably find that they're pretty decent overall. Once you decide they're decent folk maybe you'll respect their opinions and understand why America can't be everything you want right now.
Yeah, why the fuck would you want to listen to someone like Warren Buffet on the economy?
If I want investing advice, I'll ask Warren Buffet. If I want advice on running the economy of the only superpower left, I'm probably going to dig a little deeper than that.
Edit: Damn you apostrophes.
Yeah, if only more of Obama's economic advisors would insist that it's only a "mental recession." Remember, the wealth gap is a figment of your imagination.
when you go to the doctor its first come first serve but there is no reason to keep you there or help you at all really they get payed regardless (walmart-ish service quality).
If that's true, then why do Europeans (and most of the civilized world) live longer than us?
Obviously Andorra has a better health-care system than us.
Hey, if I could vote for Thomas Jefferson, I would. But there isn't a party that has those principles and there hasn't been one since the Federalist party died. What we have left is a split where both sides are retarded on half the issues.
Um, Thomas Jefferson was the chief opponent of the Federalist Party. He founded the Democratic-Republican Party to oppose the Federalists. He was an anti-Federalist. He fucking hated Hamilton. And Adams until later in life.
enlightenedbum on
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
Yeah, why the fuck would you want to listen to someone like Warren Buffet on the economy?
If I want investing advice, I'll ask Warren Buffet. If I want advice on running the economy of the only superpower left, I'm probably going to dig a little deeper than that.
Edit: Damn you apostrophes.
Yeah, if only more of Obama's economic advisors would insist that it's only a "mental recession." Remember, the wealth gap is a figment of your imagination.
What does any of this have to do with our conversation? There will always be a wealth gap and it will always be increasing, on average. This recession has nothing to do with partisan policies. It was a series of actions by the Federal Reserve, bankers, government, people, and chance.
Hey, if I could vote for Thomas Jefferson, I would. But there isn't a party that has those principles and there hasn't been one since the Federalist party died. What we have left is a split where both sides are retarded on half the issues.
Um, Thomas Jefferson was the chief opponent of the Federalist Party. He founded the Democratic-Republican Party to oppose the Federalists. He was an anti-Federalist. He fucking hated Hamilton. And Adams until later in life.
Hey, if I could vote for Thomas Jefferson, I would. But there isn't a party that has those principles and there hasn't been one since the Federalist party died. What we have left is a split where both sides are retarded on half the issues.
Um, Thomas Jefferson was the chief opponent of the Federalist Party. He founded the Democratic-Republican Party to oppose the Federalists. He was an anti-Federalist. He fucking hated Hamilton. And Adams until later in life.
Uhh... I know?
So then your statement makes no fucking sense. You would vote for Jefferson, but nobody's had those principles since the Federalist Party died. Except they had completely opposite principles.
enlightenedbum on
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
Why do people seem to think that Nader "stole" the votes from Gore in 2000? He didn't steal anything, they were the Democrats' votes to lose. It was the Democrats' fault for failing to connect with the voters and getting them to vote for them. It wasn't Nader's fault, it was Gore's/DNC's fault.
You think there aren't 500 or 600 Nader voters in Florida who only voted Nader because they thought it wouldn't make a difference? And who, given the opportunity, would have definitely changed their votes to Gore given the chance? And I'm not talking about eight years of hindsight. I'm talking about back in November of 2000.
Which just makes my point. If Gore and the DNC had made a better case in 2000, then they wouldn't have had to worry about the protest voters, or at the very least lessened any impact they might have had. Most of the people I knew who voted for Nader (yes, I knew a few; I was not one of them) weren't even Democrats, and tended to have more conservative leanings. And the ones who were Democrats said they didn't feel their party was representing them properly. Yes, I know this is anecdotal, but it seems to serve as an example of the Democrats' failure in 2000 being improperly blamed on Nader when they should have looked at why people were even protesting to begin with.
The electoral college, and the sheer size of the electorate, gives people the impression that mathematically their vote doesn't really count for much, and that they can afford to throw it to a third party to make a statement. That it won't have any effect. In 2000 a lot of those people learned that they were dead fucking wrong, which is why like seven people showed up to vote for Nader in 2004.
And this is something that really does need to be fixed. If effective change to the political system will actually take place, it needs to begin in the electoral college. If they could implement something like what the DNC did this year (proportional votes rather than winner take all) without the superdelegate crap, then we might actually be able to see the beginning of effective reform. Of course, this will never happen, since it would require the people put in power to betray the system that put them there.
Hey, if I could vote for Thomas Jefferson, I would. But there isn't a party that has those principles and there hasn't been one since the Federalist party died. What we have left is a split where both sides are retarded on half the issues.
Um, Thomas Jefferson was the chief opponent of the Federalist Party. He founded the Democratic-Republican Party to oppose the Federalists. He was an anti-Federalist. He fucking hated Hamilton. And Adams until later in life.
Uhh... I know?
So then your statement makes no fucking sense. You would vote for Jefferson, but nobody's had those principles since the Federalist Party died. Except they had completely opposite principles.
Meaning that when the Federalist party died, you had a split of the Democratic-Republican party. They've lost Jefferson's vision, you see?
when you go to the doctor its first come first serve but there is no reason to keep you there or help you at all really they get payed regardless (walmart-ish service quality).
If that's true, then why do Europeans (and most of the civilized world) live longer than us?
Obviously Andorra has a better health-care system than us.
Actually, they have a decentralized nationalized health insurance system similar to Switzerland. So, yes, they do have a better healthcare system than us.
Feral on
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
No one says Nader was wrong to run or that his criticism of the democratic party was even wrong. The argument is that people who voted for him because they thought their votes wouldn't make a difference (or that there was no difference between major candidates) were wrong.
It would've been very easy for Nader to say, you know what, I think both parties are full of shit, but I do see positive differences between them, so I'm taking my name off the ballot in florida. He didn't do that. It would've been very easy for individual voters to take similar stances, but they didn't do that. That's what's being argued against.
Eat it You Nasty Pig. on
it was the smallest on the list but
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
Posts
*cough* RankChoiceVoting *cough*
Then the question is dumb.
pleasepaypreacher.net
Oh, whatever. If you don't want to be lumped in with people who make a particular argument, don't link to Econ 101 and use all their talking points.
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
What? Oh, you fixed it. You can lump me in all you want. It doesn't matter to me, I'm just here to tell the truth.
If you don't know who to vote for, check out their websites. Watch their speeches. Divorce yourself of the false wisdom of "they won't do anything they're promising," because they will each likely try and succeed to a point in bringing about the policies they preach. So pick which one has the better-sounding vision, and which one has the more plausible solutions. And then vote for that person.
If you're insistent upon being more-cynical-than-thou, that's fine, but sit back and let the grown-ups steer the country.
gonna have to use more than ten words to do it, then.
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
Define terrible? I don't see how America is at a disadvantage in foreign relationships, we are still very powerful. As for the hawkish attitude, yet again globally and historically this is normal. This is a republic, the only policies that get enacted are the ones that are agreed upon by most people. Universal Healthcare is not a universally acceptable government program in America. I suggest you work on this from the state level, you will have much more success, there are even states out there already have such plans. It's the governments job to clean up other peoples stupid mistakes? Those people who were at the top of this scam are being prosecuted and will most likely have heavy fines and jail time. The people who bought into the scam of buying more than they can afford will have a nice lesson in economics and will be less likely to repeat this mistake if they have to pay for it, I dont see the problem
It seems like to me that you have an idealistic view of America; that we should be the perfect white knight in the world of evil, standing up for all that is right and always doing the right thing. I'm sorry, but your view of what's right is not agreed upon by everyone. No matter what anyone promises you the country will never be perfect.
;;TLDR:
Can America be "saved"? America does not need to be saved. We are not perfect, but we are just fine.
I like how you consistently make arguments with no basis whatsoever.
"Obama listens to Pelosi, RAWR RAWR RAWR!"
No policy. No intelligence. No comparison of voting records or analysis. No explanation of what policies they will enact that are harmful, because lord knows if you tried to make a point you might make a point worth debating. You base every argument you make on a cult of personality. Can America be saved from voters like you?
Aaaaand I stopped reading.
QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
If all the people running the country are crooks, that doesn't make me want to hide under a rock, it makes me want to get involved in getting rid of them. Waiting for some perfect savior to appear and give you someone to vote for is pure silliness. Government is a mean, nasty mess. Best to get down in it if you want something from it.
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
Where have you been? We need more people around here like you.
Yeah anyone voting for Mckinney should be put on a list of people to get sack punched. I'll even donate extra tax money.
pleasepaypreacher.net
What fate are you really worried about?
America isn't going to "go away." Barring alien invasion or sudden extinction of the human race due to Super-AIDS, here isn't going to be a time in the near future when the United States doesn't exist.
And I don't think we're heading to another Great Depression. Yeah, the dollar has been on a downward slide for a while and the current recession is pretty bad, but I don't think we're looking at complete economic catastrophe.
However, the US has been the dominant force in the world since long before the Cold War ended. (The USSR looked scarier than it actually was.) And by dominant, I don't mean more powerful than any other single country... I mean arguably more powerful than all the other countries put together. And I mean this on all possible axes: military power, economic power, and cultural importance. We've basically been kings of the world since World War II, if not longer.
And now our power is waning. We're still the big dog. We're still, arguably, the dominant military and economic force. But we're not quite as powerful as we were when the Iron Curtain fell. Goods are getting more expensive due to a weakening dollar. Foreign auto manufacturers are opening plants on American soil to capitalize on exchange rates rather than the other way around. Can we "save" America, King of Everything? Eh, probably not. Our empire had its day. Can we "save" America, the Country That Happens to Be a Rocking Place to Live in Most Ways Even Though Our Healthcare and Mass Transit Sucks? I don't think that's at risk of going away any time soon.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
I wish I had some kind of gigantic gold belt that I could give you right now as Undisputed Thread Champion.
You think there aren't 500 or 600 Nader voters in Florida who only voted Nader because they thought it wouldn't make a difference? And who, given the opportunity, would have definitely changed their votes to Gore given the chance? And I'm not talking about eight years of hindsight. I'm talking about back in November of 2000.
The electoral college, and the sheer size of the electorate, gives people the impression that mathematically their vote doesn't really count for much, and that they can afford to throw it to a third party to make a statement. That it won't have any effect. In 2000 a lot of those people learned that they were dead fucking wrong, which is why like seven people showed up to vote for Nader in 2004.
Oh, and if you honestly think there's no difference between the two major-party candidates in the Presidential election this year, and in most elections in general, then I'd argue that you're either A) insanely fucking stupid, or
South Park Politics (TM) is great for guys in their mid/early-20's who think being super-cynical will get them chicks. In the real world it's funny because while it contains a grain of truth it's also greatly exaggerated.
I figured it was obvious to people who knew about Obama's economic advisors. They lean much farther into the libertarian realm with regard to economic theory. What he's been saying on the campaign trail is more in line with the left of his party (Pelosi). Windfall profit taxes? He doesn't actually believe in that because he is a smart man, but I'm worried that he'll bow down to the Senate, like everyone else has done.
I've spoken pretty extensively on this stuff in other threads, just haven't done so here, because the thread premise is fucking stupid.
America doesn't need saving from anyone but the American self-loathers.
Right here yo! Although I think most people know this as "instant runoff voting"
but they're listening to every word I say
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
sounds good to me. That'll make em up fuel efficiency/switch to more effective methods.
but they're listening to every word I say
The United States has had a severe decline in international relations in the last 8 years and in trade deficits in the last 20-30.
Historical precedent is not equivalent to good or acceptable.
Look at those goal posts move! From most to universal in a couple of words!
A lack of understanding on how the economy works might have something to do with that.
Say, what do you call a market whose bottom falls out of it? Does this have an effect on other areas of the economy?
Its almost like the elements of the system are connected! Your advocacy for less good things is inherently illogical.
An overwhelming majority of the country thinks its going in the wrong direction. What happened to those republican ideals? Were they buried in Republican propaganda?
QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
I invite you start a health care thread if you honestly believe that the drivel you just posted is both true and relevant. I could crit you with a wall of text upside the head right now but it would derail this thread.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
If I want investing advice, I'll ask Warren Buffet. If I want advice on running the economy of the only superpower left, I'm probably going to dig a little deeper than that.
Edit: Damn you apostrophes.
Lot of arguing, lot of praising, lot of campaigning, nothin' doing.
Edit: I don't think anyone has a clue if the U.S. needs fixing, or if it can be fixed in the case of its failing. Even the Romans had their time to fade out.
If that's true, then why do Europeans (and most of the civilized world) live longer than us?
I agree with almost everything there (GDP is growing, not falling and the dollar is recovering right now and commodities in general are getting cheaper. Also I think you're wrong about car manufacturers).
We might have to pay more for imported goods in the future, but that was an unsustainable position to begin with. We can't rely on other countries to provide us with billions of cheap laborers forever.
The fact is the rest of the world is catching up to us economically. It's unavoidable for them to catch up. And it can be good for everybody. It's hard not to think of economic things in zero sum terms, but its not a zero sum game. Everybody can be better off. When anyone's economy grows, the US generally benefits.
To the OP:
I used to have similar feelings as you. I would suggest you get a broader sense of the world and the country. Try to understand the positions you disagree with. When you're in an insulated environment where everyone agrees with you its hard to even comprehend other views. Meet people you disagree with, you'll probably find that they're pretty decent overall. Once you decide they're decent folk maybe you'll respect their opinions and understand why America can't be everything you want right now.
Obviously Andorra has a better health-care system than us.
Um, Thomas Jefferson was the chief opponent of the Federalist Party. He founded the Democratic-Republican Party to oppose the Federalists. He was an anti-Federalist. He fucking hated Hamilton. And Adams until later in life.
What does any of this have to do with our conversation? There will always be a wealth gap and it will always be increasing, on average. This recession has nothing to do with partisan policies. It was a series of actions by the Federal Reserve, bankers, government, people, and chance.
Uhh... I know?
So then your statement makes no fucking sense. You would vote for Jefferson, but nobody's had those principles since the Federalist Party died. Except they had completely opposite principles.
Which just makes my point. If Gore and the DNC had made a better case in 2000, then they wouldn't have had to worry about the protest voters, or at the very least lessened any impact they might have had. Most of the people I knew who voted for Nader (yes, I knew a few; I was not one of them) weren't even Democrats, and tended to have more conservative leanings. And the ones who were Democrats said they didn't feel their party was representing them properly. Yes, I know this is anecdotal, but it seems to serve as an example of the Democrats' failure in 2000 being improperly blamed on Nader when they should have looked at why people were even protesting to begin with.
And this is something that really does need to be fixed. If effective change to the political system will actually take place, it needs to begin in the electoral college. If they could implement something like what the DNC did this year (proportional votes rather than winner take all) without the superdelegate crap, then we might actually be able to see the beginning of effective reform. Of course, this will never happen, since it would require the people put in power to betray the system that put them there.
Meaning that when the Federalist party died, you had a split of the Democratic-Republican party. They've lost Jefferson's vision, you see?
Actually, they have a decentralized nationalized health insurance system similar to Switzerland. So, yes, they do have a better healthcare system than us.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
It would've been very easy for Nader to say, you know what, I think both parties are full of shit, but I do see positive differences between them, so I'm taking my name off the ballot in florida. He didn't do that. It would've been very easy for individual voters to take similar stances, but they didn't do that. That's what's being argued against.
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget